Steve Irwin - animal tormentor

[sharky 2]

Most parents wouldn't put their kid within 5 feet of a crocodile that wasn't behind a 6 inch glass screen, let alone feed one whilst holding a baby. I don't think anyone will say that those animals are totally predictable - quite the opposite, and having watched his show and seeing Irwin almost get caught on a number of occasions, its hard to claim how that is not irresponsible.

It's not as if Steve Irwin has made the sole or most profound contribution to naturalism and conservation -

Erekose,

I hear what you are saying, but lets face it Steve Irwin isn't most parents when it comes to crocs is he? He was brought up around them and has years and years of experience of how they act and how to handle them. That doesn't mean he knows exactly what they are thinking or how they will react at all times!... but it does make him a very experienced handler of these creatures....... certainly much more than most parents and that is why I consider his actions at the time were deemed more foolhardy than actually putting that child at risk........

he didn't hang the baby over a balcony whilst it riggled to get free........ there's much more chance of endangering a child that way....

as far as making a contribution to conservation, yes you are right in a way......... I would hold a lot more people above him as making a more significant, professional and scientific contribution towards conservation (David Attenborough being at the top for me)......... but he did reach a heck of a lot of people by TV.......... and if that gets even a few of them saying "hey these creature are fascinating, I din't know they were endagered"....... then that has to be a good thing doesn't it?

[Marc and Olga 0]

Ok, so:

Britney Spears, Michael Jackson and Steve Irwin will NOT win Parent of the Year awards anytime soon.

[*Robert* 2]

Ok, so:

Britney Spears, Michael Jackson and Steve Irwin will NOT win Parent of the Year awards anytime soon.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I was thinking about Britney after the reference to Michael too!!!

[iceyspots 0]

Good question. Why is Diana so great again? Mother Teresa died shortly after and the media was obligated to honor her as much as Diana. Remember that?

Steve Irwin did do a lot for conservation but is anyone surprised he was killed by an animal he was filming?

i'm still baffled by why diana overshadowed mother teresa. i feel mother teresa did far more in her lifetime than diana did, and that diana's accomplishments were primarily due to her position/rank.

and no, not the least bit surprised he was killed by an animal. mess with the bull........get the horns, ya know?

I think it was the fact that Diana's death was fast and tragic and it made headlines and tabloids for months... Mother Theresa was up in age... she was ready to go... It's all about the media hype.

[*Robert* 2]

Icey, are you accusing the media of "hyping" stories?!

[Marc and Olga 0]

Good question. Why is Diana so great again? Mother Teresa died shortly after and the media was obligated to honor her as much as Diana. Remember that?

Steve Irwin did do a lot for conservation but is anyone surprised he was killed by an animal he was filming?

i'm still baffled by why diana overshadowed mother teresa. i feel mother teresa did far more in her lifetime than diana did, and that diana's accomplishments were primarily due to her position/rank.

and no, not the least bit surprised he was killed by an animal. mess with the bull........get the horns, ya know?

I think it was the fact that Diana's death was fast and tragic and it made headlines and tabloids for months... Mother Theresa was up in age... she was ready to go... It's all about the media hype.

Whoa, I missed the whole Diana/Mother Teresa thing!

Fact is Diana was well known and loved but despite Mother Teresa's good she was not as well known, other then by name...

Also Diana was young and beautiful and had a tragic ending

Icey, are you accusing the media of "hyping" stories?!

Wha...that's NEWS to me

Edited September 7, 2006 by Marc and Olga

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Diana knew how to manipulate the media and play up to a preconceived image as some sort of helpless victim.

During her divorce it was Charles who was made to look like the arsehole - despite the fact that she had more than a few extra marital affairs, and over a period of months the British public were subjected to her troubled "inner monologue" in tabloid newspapers and TV interviews.

Noone forced her to marry the guy - it was Charles that apparently had no choice - he always wanted to marry Camilla (or "Old Horse Face" depending which paper you read).

Diana did a lot of charity work, but much of it was exaggerated after her death - especially the whole "land-mine crusade". The whole state funeral thing (complete with Elton John) was farcical IMO.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Erekose,

I hear what you are saying, but lets face it Steve Irwin isn't most parents when it comes to crocs is he? He was brought up around them and has years and years of experience of how they act and how to handle them. That doesn't mean he knows exactly what they are thinking or how they will react at all times!... but it does make him a very experienced handler of these creatures....... certainly much more than most parents and that is why I consider his actions at the time were deemed more foolhardy than actually putting that child at risk........

he didn't hang the baby over a balcony whilst it riggled to get free........ there's much more chance of endangering a child that way....

I have a hard time seeing how any parent could put their child in any sort of obvious danger like that. Steve was an experienced guy there's no denying that - but I can see any naturalist or animal expert making the claim that wild animals like Crocodiles, Lions - even certain types of domestic dog are dangerous and unpredicable. Why would you add your child to that equation?

as far as making a contribution to conservation, yes you are right in a way......... I would hold a lot more people above him as making a more significant, professional and scientific contribution towards conservation (David Attenborough being at the top for me)......... but he did reach a heck of a lot of people by TV.......... and if that gets even a few of them saying "hey these creature are fascinating, I din't know they were endagered"....... then that has to be a good thing doesn't it?

Yeah but a lot of people watched his show to see him get attacked. Rather like how certain people watch motor-racing for the car crashes.

Erekose,

I hear what you are saying, but lets face it Steve Irwin isn't most parents when it comes to crocs is he? He was brought up around them and has years and years of experience of how they act and how to handle them. That doesn't mean he knows exactly what they are thinking or how they will react at all times!... but it does make him a very experienced handler of these creatures....... certainly much more than most parents and that is why I consider his actions at the time were deemed more foolhardy than actually putting that child at risk........

he didn't hang the baby over a balcony whilst it riggled to get free........ there's much more chance of endangering a child that way....

I have a hard time seeing how any parent could put their child in any sort of obvious danger like that. Steve was an experienced guy there's no denying that - but I can't see any naturalist or animal expert making the claim that wild animals like Crocodiles, Lions - even certain types of domestic dog aren't dangerous and highly unpredictable. Why would you add your child to that equation?

as far as making a contribution to conservation, yes you are right in a way......... I would hold a lot more people above him as making a more significant, professional and scientific contribution towards conservation (David Attenborough being at the top for me)......... but he did reach a heck of a lot of people by TV.......... and if that gets even a few of them saying "hey these creature are fascinating, I din't know they were endagered"....... then that has to be a good thing doesn't it?

Yeah but a lot of people watched his show to see him get attacked. Rather like how certain people watch motor-racing for the car crashes.

[Identity 0]

It's not as if Steve Irwin has made the sole or most profound contribution to naturalism and conservation -

as far as making a contribution to conservation, yes you are right in a way......... I would hold a lot more people above him as making a more significant, professional and scientific contribution towards conservation (David Attenborough being at the top for me)......... but he did reach a heck of a lot of people by TV.......... and if that gets even a few of them saying "hey these creature are fascinating, I din't know they were endagered"....... then that has to be a good thing doesn't it?

This had all been done before Steve Irwin had gone around screaming at animals, yelling 'crikey!'

Can anyone remember shows like "Animals Animals Animals" hosted by Hal Linden, with songs by that woman Lynn Kellogg? Great show.

Now we know why mother nature armed stingrays with their defensive barb. LOL.